RELATIONSHIPS WITH ORGANIZATIONS: On the promotion and
strengthening of relationships with other relevant conventions and
international organizations, institutions and agencies (ICCD/COP(8)/4
and ICCD/COP(8)/MISC.1), the UN Forum on Forests highlighted areas for
collaboration with the UNCCD. ARGENTINA and NORWAY called for closer
work between the scientific bodies of the Rio conventions. ARGENTINA
emphasized the need for technical and political linkages, in particular
between the UNCCD and the UNFCCC.

TURKEY said synergies should focus on soil management. Additional
synergies were suggested with: Ramsar (SOUTH AFRICA and NORWAY); UNFF
(NORWAY and SAINT LUCIA); World Heritage (SOUTH AFRICA); and UN-Water
(CANADA). NORWAY, BRAZIL and AUSTRALIA said the distinct mandates of the
conventions must be respected. AUSTRALIA emphasized including
priorities, timelines and milestones in collaborative programmes and
said the UNCCD should not start a work programme on climate change.

Delegates highlighted linkages between the goals of the UNCCD and
reducing poverty (SOUTH AFRICA, QATAR, SAUDI ARABIA, TANZANIA and
ECUADOR), sustainable forest management (KENYA) and poverty, forests and
water resources (CHINA). IRAN highlighted the ongoing process on
national capacity self-assessment.

Parties suggested promoting synergies at the programme, local, national
and/or regional levels and between national strategies. ISRAEL said
on-the-ground cooperation is required before synergies are developed.
The G-77/CHINA, TANZANIA, INDONESIA and COLOMBIA stressed the need for
support to promote synergies.

ARGENTINA, SAINT LUCIA, GHANA, QATAR, ECUADOR and MOROCCO highlighted
projects that promote synergies within their countries, with GHANA and
ECUADOR thanking the GM for its support, and GHANA thanking Canada,
their chef de file. UNEP highlighted its projects on harmonized
and on-line national reporting, knowledge management for biodiversity
conventions, and Issue-Based Modules.

OUTCOME OF WSSD: On follow-up to the outcome from the WSSD that
is relevant to the Convention, and preparation of the sixteenth and
seventeenth sessions of the Committee on Sustainable Development (CSD)
(ICCD/COP(8)/5 and Add.1), countries noted the opportunity to raise the
profile of the UNCCD at CSD 16 and 17, which will focus on agriculture,
rural development, land, drought and desertification. SAUDI ARABIA urged
the Secretariat to make adequate preparations. KENYA and CHINA noted the
opportunity to raise awareness of the UNCCD in the global arena, with
CHINA emphasizing the potential to address funding problems. Among the
issues recommended for CSD consideration were: the consequences of
inaction and benefits of addressing land degradation (SOUTH AFRICA);
where and when to relieve land from pressure (ISRAEL); an evaluation of
official development assistance (BRAZIL); means of implementation
(G-77/CHINA); and mining and urbanization (ZIMBABWE). BRAZIL said all
options on agriculture must be compatible with WTO provisions. The EU
highlighted the contribution that the adoption of the ten-year strategic
plan could make to the CSD.

IYDD: On the outcome of the IYDD (ICCD/COP(8)/11), ALGERIA,
supported by SYRIA, JORDAN, the NGO Cuban Association of the UN, SAUDI
ARABIA, TUNISIA and the G-77/CHINA, proposed calling on the UN General
Assembly to declare 2010-2020 as the decade of deserts and
desertification. The DOMINICAN REPUBLIC reported on the Fifth Latin
America–Africa Forum, highlighting the benefits of South-South
cooperation. Additional IYDD activities discussed included: “Villages on
the Front Line,” eight documentaries that aired on BBC World television
during 2006 (GM); an international conference on women and
desertification (CHINA); a scientific conference on the future of
drylands (TUNISIA); a film on deserts and desertification in the Arab
world (AMU—League of Arab States); selecting deserts and desertification
as the theme for World Environment Day and producing Global Deserts
Outlook (UNEP); and sponsoring a training workshop (EGYPT).

HOST COUNTRY: On the report on relations between the Secretariat
and its host country (ICCD/COP(8)/12), GERMANY thanked the Secretariat
for its review of relations and looked forward to meeting the new
Executive Secretary to discuss the possibilities of continued
cooperation.

OPEN-ENDED CONTACT GROUP – PROGRAMME
AND BUDGET

Ositadinma Anaedu (Nigeria) chaired the afternoon meeting of the contact
group on the programme and budget. The Secretariat introduced a draft
decision, highlighting paragraphs: authorizing the Executive Secretary
to notify the parties of their contributions for 2008 and 2009 in euros;
deciding to introduce the euro as the accounting currency from
2010-2011; requesting the Executive Secretary to include, in addition to
the proposed budget for 2010-2011, two alternative scenarios maintaining
the core budget at the 2008-2009 level at 0% nominal growth and 0% real
growth in euros; and adopting the indicative scale of contributions for
2008 and 2009. Participants expressed a wish for a more focused and
shorter draft decision, requested the Secretariat to streamline it in
line with the priorities identified in the strategic plan, inquired
about the percentage of the staff cost in the budget, and expressed
concern that the average expenditure per person under different items
such as salary, travel and training is higher than for the other Rio
convention secretariats.

OPEN-ENDED CONTACT GROUP – CRIC

The contact group on the CRIC began a second reading of their draft
decisions. On draft decision 1 (strengthening Convention
implementation), they struggled to find a balance between affected and
developed country party responsibilities. Developing countries accepted
a provision inviting them to establish an enabling environment for
sustainable land management, but proposed that land tenure and
governance be removed from the list of ways in which this environment
could be created. The change was adopted.

Discussions also focused on ways to incorporate the concept of
traditional knowledge in the decisions, with one delegation requesting
the inclusion of protection and sharing of benefits related to
traditional knowledge. Some delegations urged the inclusion of
integrated water management when referring to sustainable land
management, with one party noting that water issues encourage support,
but this reference was rejected.

After discussion, parties agreed to separate paragraphs related to
financial resources from developed country parties and multilateral
organizations, and from the GEF. They agreed to invite developed country
parties and multilateral organizations to “mobilize and provide
substantial financial resources from all sources” and to reserve text
related to “adequate, timely and predictable financial resources” for a
paragraph on the GEF. As of 8:30 pm, delegates were still discussing
draft decision 1.

OPEN-ENDED CONTACT GROUP – STRATEGIC
PLAN

The contact group chaired by Sem Shikongo (Namibia) met in the afternoon
and late into the night to discuss a draft decision on the ten-year
strategic plan (SP) and framework to enhance the implementation of the
Convention. Shikongo circulated the first full draft decision,
containing 48 paragraphs. He reported agreement on the preambular
paragraphs that recognize the primary responsibility of parties in
delivering the objectives of the Convention and underline the importance
of the efficient implementation of the Convention in addressing
desertification and land degradation. Shikongo noted that while the
“Friends of the Chair Group” had agreement on the provisions on the RCUs,
agreement on the Secretariat-GM coordination is pending.

Delegates reached agreement on several elements. They agreed on a
decision requesting all parties to operationalize the implementation of
the SP in the context of their national priorities in the spirit of
international solidarity and cooperation and to report progress made
towards this at COP 9. Delegates deferred discussion of the request that
the Secretariat aid parties, where appropriate, to mobilize resources to
support the realignment of their NAPs with the SP.

The decision requests the CST to: prepare, in collaboration with its
bureau and that of the COP, a costed two-year work programme consistent
with the SP and to consider it at CST 9; act on a COP 8 decision to
realign its work and on reshaping the CST in line with the SP; and
advise the COP on how best to measure progress on the strategic
objectives of the SP. Further, it proposes that the CST present the work
programme to COP 9 for consideration and adoption, and decides that the
CST 9 focus theme should be biophysical and socio-economic monitoring
and assessment of desertification and land degradation.

The decision determines that the CRIC is the body responsible for
reviewing and monitoring implementation of the SP, requests the CRIC to
prepare a multi-year programme of work that is consistent with the SP,
calls for an agenda item on this subject for CRIC 7, and calls for
finalizing proposals on various aspects of performance monitoring for
consideration at COP 9. The CRIC is also requested to address its
methodological format at CRIC 7, but discussion of a proposal deciding
on a predominantly interactive format was deferred.

Discussion of the elements concerning the GM was deferred to allow some
groups to consult on the proposals that: request the GM to revise its
existing results-based management approach in line with the SP and to
present its proposed work plan to COP; urge it to mobilize resources
needed by affected country parties; and focus on the efficient and
effective delivery of its core functions, including the priorities laid
out in the SP.

AD HOC GROUP OF EXPERTS

The Ad Hoc Group of Experts (AHGE) considered procedures and
institutional mechanisms for the resolution of questions on
implementation (ICCD/COP(8)/7) and annexes containing arbitration and
conciliation procedures (ICCD/COP(8)/8). The Secretariat noted that the
two issues have been pending since COP 2. Delegations commented that
since implementation of the ten-year strategic plan and the CRIC’s
future are still under discussion, consideration of the items is
premature. The Secretariat was requested to prepare two draft decisions,
including paragraphs: deferring the consideration of the two items to
COP 9; inviting parties to submit their views to the Secretariat; and
requesting the Secretariat to prepare two documents to be submitted to
the next COP. The AHGE will consider the draft decisions Tuesday.

IN THE CORRIDORS

While the “budget battle (BB)” commenced in the
contact group on programme and budget, the potential for long discussions could be felt
in the corridors. One delegate made it clear that his government
objected to any increase of the Secretariat’s budget, while another
delegation preferred a small increase if the strategic plan is adopted
and a framework is formulated for its implementation. Other delegations
supported deciding the programme first before talking about the budget.
Several developing country parties said the Secretariat should be
provided with adequate funds to implement the programme. One delegation
said his regional group will meet tomorrow to discuss how to avoid a
repeat of the BB experience at COP 7.

This issue of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin �
<enb@iisd.org>
is written and edited by
Alexandra Conliffe, Wagaki
Mwangi, Lynn Wagner, Ph.D.
and Kunbao Xia. The Digital
Editor is Markus Staas. The
Editor is Pamela S. Chasek,
Ph.D. <pam@iisd.org>.
The Director of IISD
Reporting Services is
Langston James “Kimo” Goree
VI <kimo@iisd.org>.
The Sustaining Donors of the
Bulletin are the
United Kingdom (through the
Department for International
Development – DFID), the
Government of the United
States of America (through
the Department of State
Bureau of Oceans and
International Environmental
and Scientific Affairs), the
Government of Canada
(through CIDA), the Danish
Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
the Government of Germany
(through the German Federal
Ministry of Environment -
BMU, and the German Federal
Ministry of Development
Cooperation - BMZ), the
Netherlands Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, the
European Commission (DG-ENV)
and the Italian Ministry for
the Environment, Land and
Sea. General Support for the
Bulletin during 2007
is provided by the Swiss
Federal Office for the
Environment (FOEN), the
Norwegian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and the
Ministry of Environment, the
Government of Australia, the
Austrian Federal Ministry
for the Environment, the
Ministry of Environment of
Sweden, the New Zealand
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and Trade, SWAN
International, the Japanese
Ministry of Environment
(through the Institute for
Global Environmental
Strategies - IGES) and the
Japanese Ministry of
Economy, Trade and Industry
(through the Global
Industrial and Social
Progress Research Institute
- GISPRI). Funding for
translation of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin
into French has been
provided by the
International Organization
of the Francophonie (IOF)
and the French Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. Funding for
the translation of the
Earth Negotiations Bulletin
into Spanish has been
provided by the Ministry of
Environment of Spain. The
opinions expressed in the
Earth Negotiations Bulletin
are those of the authors
and do not necessarily
reflect the views of IISD or
other donors. Excerpts from
the Earth Negotiations
Bulletin may be used in
non-commercial publications
with appropriate academic
citation. For information on
the Bulletin,
including requests to
provide reporting services,
contact the Director of IISD
Reporting Services at <kimo@iisd.org>,
+1-646-536-7556 or 212 East
47th St. #21F, New York, NY
10017, USA. The ENB Team at
UNCCD COP 8 can be contacted
by e-mail at <lynn@iisd.org>.